Regarding the editorial "Greenhouse gases" (Page A19, Saturday), "blamed for" is not proof, as the impact of manmade greenhouse gas vs. natural climate change is a blame-game, not scientific fact, even as millions of taxpayer dollars is devoted to academia and government agencies to try to make it fact, the United Nations political policies notwithstanding. Change has defined climate for billions of years. Now it is a money-making scare tactic.

Recent hottest years? Thank cyclical El Niños for that.

The editorial ignores EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy's testimony that the Clean Power Plan would have no measurable impact on global climate and might reduce global temperature by a minuscule 0.01 C, but would make electricity needlessly more expensive.

Translator

To read this article in one of Houston's most-spoken languages, click on the button below.

"Global battle to preserve life as we know it"? Would that be the multitude of labor-saving inventions, medical and pharmaceutical advances, agricultural and transportation advances all powered by inexpensive and reliable fossil-fueled energy, and threatened by government imposition of expensive renewables.

Flawed science as fact is the real danger.

Charles Battig, Houston

Study history

Regarding "Trump's election? Maybe it's a matter of degrees" (Page A2, Tuesday), John Banzhaf's commentary points out what is annoying to many. He mentions colleges having classes and/or departments in LGBT studies, Hispanic studies, African-American studies, etc. Nowadays, students study everything but history and how our political system is designed and works.

Obviously, what colleges need to offer are studies in "Ethics and the Business of Politics." When one looks at the net worth of politicians before and after (or during) their tenure in public office, it's a study in white-collar crime.

If light was shed on the real goings-on of these politicians, our society would perhaps have a more realistic view of our country and the world - and our politicians' real motives for what they do.

M. Donnelly, Pearland

Saving babies

Regarding "All newborns deserve a chance" (Page A19, Saturday), the support of USAID has been vital in funding trials of the creative medical interventions developed by Prof. Rebecca Richards-Kortum and her engineering students at Rice University. The Reach Every Mother and Child Act, a bill in the current Congress, contains reforms that will hold USAID accountable for continuing to develop such smart, cost-effective approaches to ending preventable maternal and child deaths. With its strategy that puts kids and mothers first, the Reach Act can help make sure that every single child in the world - regardless of where they are born - has a chance to not only survive, but to thrive.

The Reach Act has broad bipartisan support in the House of Representatives, with 77 Republican cosponsors and 139 Democrats. Rep. Mike McCaul, R-Austin, is one of the original sponsors of the bill. Our two Texas senators should now step up and show leadership in the Senate to assure that the Act becomes law. Passage of the Reach Act is not only the right thing to do for mothers and babies in low-resource countries, it will also enrich educational opportunities for students at one of our premier local universities.